Pages

Monday, October 22, 2012

Why Sovereigntists Should Consider Partition

In many respects I have a great deal of sympathy for sovereigntists who have taken it on the chin and remained democrats throughout the painful referendum process, a thirty year ordeal that can only be described as devastating to those who passionately believe in creating an independent state.

So close and yet so far.

There seems to be something inherently unfair about a winner take all process that perpetually leaves almost one-third to almost half the population out in the cold, politically speaking, on such an important issue.

It's not something we consider, those of us who are federalists and who have won both referendums and in almost all likelihood would win any referendum in the foreseeable future.

But sometimes winning is losing, especially when the victory resolves nothing. The NO victories of the last two referendums left Quebec in eternal limbo and where no full and final reckoning seems to be possible.

While sovereigntists accepted defeat graciously, they didn't accept giving up their dream or abandoning their efforts to militate for sovereignty and so we survive these referendums, committed federalists and committed sovereigntists, in a perpetual state of angst.

As an Anglo, you can well understand that I am not a sovereigntist, but I have no quarrel with those who want Quebec to secede from Canada, they are not Nazis, they are not xenophobes and they aren't all that hateful, believe me.
Not to say that there aren't idiots and extremists among them, as there is in our own community.

Most Canadians outside Quebec, as well many Anglos within, cannot truck sovereigntists on any level and take an aggressive and hostile attitude towards anyone who has the impertinence and the audacity to militate in favour of a new country.

But there is another reality which I have lived (and many of you) where federalists and sovereigntists live and work side by side, respecting each other's politics and sometimes, more often than you think, maintaining friendships across what one would think is an insurmountable political and philosophical divide.

Years ago I went on my first fishing trip, invited by a friend I had made while conducting business over the years, in the Lac-Saint-Jean region.
Jean-Pierre, is a couple years older than I, a calm, deeply spiritual gentleman who just happened to be a passionate sovereigntist.
On the trip we got around to talking politics where he explained that he didn't hate Canada or Anglophones, he just wanted his own country where he could enjoy a francophone Quebecois brand of culture without the imposition of anglophone politics, values and culture.
He used the analogy of a teen growing up and moving out of his parents' home, a case of personal growth, not a rejection of family.

I came to realize two things on that trip, the first, that I hated fishing and would never go again, and the second, that sovereigntist had a valid and legitimate dream, and although it is one that I didn't share, it was one that I could never again reject as illegitimate.

But for sovereigntists, holding onto this dream is no longer realistic, and Quebec independence is fading quickly from the realm of possibility.

Most watershed moments in history are hard to appreciate at the time.
Sometimes the impact of historical events can only be properly recognized at an indefinable point in the future, a time where we can look back and clearly see how an event marked or changed the course of history.
Such an event was the 1995 referendum which the sovereignty side lost by a whisker. The disappointed losers made brave declarations that the momentum towards sovereignty would be maintained, ultimately leading to victory, but looking back, it is clear that on the night of the referendum in 1995, the Quebec sovereignty movement had 'jumped the shark.'

Perhaps the diehards should consider what the ex-PQ Premier of Quebec, Lucien Bouchard said about the issue of sovereignty in a newspaper interview that was quite revealing;

"Pauline Marois, needs to say no to the concept of apopular initiative referendumon sovereignty, because Quebecersdo not want it. Theyare not there," said Bouchard.Especially because a thirddefeat would beinevitable.Pay careful attention to what follows;After the referendum defeat of1995, Ottawaimposed theClarity ActandLucienBouchardthought he could get Quebecersto repudiate the law by asking them to hold a referendum onthe subject.Well,guess what!It turned out that Quebecerswere notopposed to the Clarity Act!"Wewould havelost the referendum, and itwould have been in fact, a public endorsement oftheClarity Act!" said the the formerPrime Minister,yesterday,stilldisappointed withthis disarming observation.Imaginea referendumtoday imposedby a minority of'caribou!' A thirddefeatwould have dramatic and lasting consequences.Betternot even to think about..." Link{Fr}

While aging sovereigntists rage on in the pages of vigile.net, demanding
a referendum that they will no doubt lose, the more practicable
nationalists seek to develop a de facto autonomous province that barely
operates within the confines of the Canadian federation.
And so, for real sovereigntists and federalists, the status quo is not a solution, each remain unhappy with a province that is neither here nor there.

So perhaps it time for sovereigntists to consider the unthinkable, the partition of Quebec in a process somewhat like that which took apart Czechoslavakia, a process that concentrated on creating winners and not losers.

Before we do that, let us consider another aspect to the debate, that is the widening chasm to what Montreal is and always was, and what sovereigntist wish it to be.

The sovereigntist dream of an independent Quebec is based on the notion of a French-speaking country that has a homogeneous culture based on a narrowly defined set of ideals that are as foreign to Montreal as hijabs in Sept-Iles.

Montreal has always been a bilingual and ethnically diverse city, nothing has really changed, yet the sovereigntist fantasy remains that Montreal was once an all French city and can return to something it never was and therein lies the rub.
It is like a parent deciding that their child is not really gay and can be returned to the fold of heterosexuality through discipline, re-education, repression and brute force.

Good luck with that.

The sovereigntists should well consider letting go of Montreal. For them, it is a lost cause, not only does its soul swim in an opposite direction to what sovereigntists want Quebec to be, its voting bloc remains the last stumbling block holding back sovereigntists from achieving their goal.

Give up Montreal and sovereignty is a reality for the rest of Quebec, not in thirty years or 50 years or a hundred, but now.

A sovereignty referendum that included leaving Montreal out, allowing it to become a Canadian city-province would be approved by a majority of Quebecers because Anglos and ethnics would vote in favour of such an arrangement by a wide margin.

Sovereignty based on a such a wide consensus would likely be successful. This type of arrangement would also likely be very acceptable to Canada.
If such a friendly divorce could be adopted, a free trade agreement would likely work, where the free flow of people and goods and services between Canada (the province of Montreal) and the country of Quebec would be realistic.

For sovereigntists today, there is a real question to face and a realistic and honest assessment to be made.
With the prospects of achieving a winner-take-all referendum unlikely, is it better to wait for an eternity for a miracle or is it better to put some water in the wine and accept less now.

The reality is that Quebec can become a country within a year or two if separatists are willing to give up Montreal.

The question for them to consider is whether settling for three-quarters of a loaf is preferable to having none and is holding out for a miracle really in their best interest.

285 comments:

Actually, it’s more like half a loaf… or a third of a loaf or actually, a quarter loaf, if that. Although your proposition is most logical, you also know perfectly well that seppies want the whole loaf and nothing less. Besides Montreal and the Pontiac, the northern 2/3rds of the province will skedaddle as well following any separation.

Comparisons to Czechoslovakia often fail to mention that, unlike Quebec and Canada with their long-term mutual history, the Czech Republic (Bohemia) and Slovakia only had 75 years of convergent history and 1000 years of history with little to nothing in common. Preceding the multinational union of Austria-Hungary, the Czechs were closer to Austria and the Slovaks were closer to Hungary, so that it took only 3 years after the Velvet Revolution for the dissolution of Czechoslovakia (which was opposed by Václav Havel and who chose to resign rather preside over the dissolution). Transfer payments from the richer Czech Republic to Slovakia ended and today tourists flock to Prague but Bratislava, not so much.

As for those who continue to idealize the nostalgic “teen growing up and moving out” imagery, it may be that some think we are still living in the days of Ozzie and Harriet or Les Plouffe but in fact, let’s not forget that these days are actually characterized by the Boomerang Generation.

Speaking of boomerang kids and teenager allegories, did you know that Newfoundland was the only British colony to revert to British control after the Dominion administration went bankrupt? In order to get rid of them, the British organized a Referendum to join Canada, where the referendum failed. So they held a second one later on because they were not ok with keeping Newfoundland as a dependant. The second one passed. and that's how we gained our 10th province in 1949!

Newfoundland is the allegory of the teenager who moves out, runs out of money, comes back home, then Mom shakes hell and heaven to get him to move in with his more responsible older brother.

Another weird analogy with Quebec - the referendum that introduced Newfoundland as a 10th province passed with only 52% of the vote, and as far as I know the issue was indeed settled definitively as soon as that magic threshold was reached only once.

If we're going to hold Quebec to a "clear majority" we should probably kick Newfoundland out for the spirit of fairness. Not that they'd mind with their oil derricks nowadays.

Regarding Newfoundland’s referendum, just because something happened once doesn’t mean that’s how it must be done for the remainder of time. Yannick has pointed out for us just how different Newfoundland’s own situation was compared to Quebec’s back then.

Besides, the doctrine of a legal precedent is not usually used in civil law systems such as Quebec’s, thus seppies would be placing themselves in an extremely awkward situation by trying to resort to using British-origin common law principles to justify themselves by citing this example.

Having visited Newfoundland a few times, I'm glad they're with us. They're nice, hospitable people, the most hospitable in Canada. When planes were grounded in NF back on 9/11, I KNEW the ones who landed in NF were the luckiest! To them, visitors are gold, and they were treated that way. One couple from Seattle drove all the way across the continent a year later to visit those who shared their hospitality with the the locals in Gander that took them in. The proof is in the pudding.

NF was a have-not province for decades before oil drilling brought in much greater revenues. While NF is very unspoiled, it is isolated. The cost of food and goods is a bit higher there because of shipping costs, plus before GST & HST came in the provincial sales tax rate was 12%, and almost 20% when the GST came in at 7%. That's a heavy burden on low wage earners. In spite of all that, they're still the nicest people. I'll never leave NF behind.

Newfoundlanders are quite aware that Francophones like yourself make fun of them and that's why they don't like you at all, despite the fact, as Mr. Sauga stated, that they are the nicest people you will find anywhere.

Huh Durham? I'm not trying to make fun of Newfoundlanders for being Newfoundlanders, I just like odd, counter-intuitive trivia. For Newfoundland, it's just that they have what is probably the least edifying history ever. And it's not like I single them out, I also make fun of Albertans for thinking they can elect senators, and I'm quite amused to remind people that Nova Scotia was this country's first openly secessionist province.

I see, your accusation is refuted so you change tactics and throw up red herrings and non-sequitors. I'm not impressed.

I'm not affected by how I said I would defend Nazis if people said untrue things about them, I stand behind those words now as then. It's not shaming me like you obviously are trying to do. This is not an "I win" button for your arguments. Why do you keep bringing it up, as if it was?

Not me, I have the mental fortitude to not fall in for the emotional appeal of the fallacy of "guilt by association" and I firmly believe that to condemn evil persons on dishonest ground is to detract from the evil of what evils they really have committed.

I have been a partitionist for years but we need to be clear about two things: Montreal IS NOT the only federalist area in the racist province of Kaybec. The Outaouais including Alymer, Pontiac and Hull house some of the strongest federalist areas of the province. In addition, the Townships have parts p very strong anglophone concentration, as does the South Shore. Any talk of partition must not disenfranchise areas of strong Canadians.On the flip side, the east part of Montreal is home to some of the most ardent and violent separatists around. They wuold go neither willingly nor peacefully. Montreal itself needs to be partitioned, perhaps on St. Denis Street, perhaps further east. The CRMP should be around to make sure both countries' citizens move freely and safely if they need to. Think Berlin or Jerusalem. It CAN be done. It HAS been done. It MUST be done.Of course, any francophone wanting to travel west would have to pass a passport check (as would any anglo who for some reason wants to travel into the east end), subtly discouraging frequent trips of this nature.Aside from the obvious (not using the Canadian dollar, giving back each and every military base and federal building etc.), the issue of borders should be discussed with the separatists BEFORE the referendum to throw Quebec out of Canada, not after.

I totally agree - each of the federal districts should and deserve to have a say in their future. The rules for this would have to be drawn up prior to any referendum(s) and we must have the cooperation of the separatists to do this without rancor. They must be informed, by Ottawa, of the rules of leaving, including no use of the Canadian dollar, no more handouts, no more say in the future of Canada, in any way whatsoever. If an area of Quebec decides to leave, they must pay for any federal government establishment lying within their jurisdiction (not counting our military bases which goes without saying) and no force is to be used by either side once the vote has been determined. All of this is possible if people are reasonable.

The way I see it would be that the Southeast portion of Montreal Island should be allowed to remain on Montreal Island. Lets say everything east of St Laurent or St Denis and South of the Beaubien or even a few more streets further south. Based on how each area votes in the referendum for creation of the new province. On the other hand Brossard, Greenfield Park, parts of the south Shore and Western and parts of Eastern Laval should be allowed to merge with the Montreal. Its not impractical. Boundaries in urban areas especially in the United States are divided on state lines and there is still free flow of traffic from one state to another. I mean it would be both sides interests to have free flow travel. Also the Lower North Shore that has a sizeable Anglophone and Native population might have to join Newfoundland or New Brunswick as there would not be a possibility of continuity of a land border with a new bilingual province created out of Quebec.

Also they can cry all they want about loosing much of their land. But they won't be able to do anything about it. They stopped crying about loosing parts of the lower north Shore to Newfoundland. Besides there is nothing they can do about it.

Once a new province is partitioned out of Quebec. I think Francophones wouldn't want to have their own country as much. Reason is the majority of the 21% minority population that pays 40% of the taxes would no longer be squeezable. Also by staying a province what is left of Quebec can still take advantage of the James Bay agreement, despite in all likelihood northern Quebec opting to join a new bilingual province. Also there is the equalization factor. Without any sizable minorities in Quebec any longer francophones in what is left of Quebec would have to debate among themselves what they want.

Here are some reasons why I suspect what is left of Quebec wouldn't pursue sovereignty outright once they get a province that is over 95% francophone.

1- Without minority dominated areas in Quebec, there would a province that is as French as Ontario is English (probably even more French then Ontario is English).

2- They would still be able to keep 75 seats in the Canadian parliament.

3- Being a poorer province after loosing much of Montreal and Western Quebec, they would qualify for more equalization.

4- You would have 2 fully bilingual provinces like New Brunswick. 1 Fully French province of Quebec and a few provinces like Manitoba, Ontario, PEI and maybe even Nova Scotia, Newfoundland that offer extensive French government services.

5- As long as Quebec stays in Canada, Canada will not be able to drop French as an official language from Coast to Coast.

6- Without the shackles of Language legislation and uncertainty Montreal Island and points west to the Ontario Border would boom. There would still be alot of indirect economic spin off to the areas in Quebec around Montreal.

Also there is a 6 point. At the moment there is a big complaint by the Quebec Nationalistes that the immigrants are not completely integrating with the pur laine. Well one of the reasons is that Family immigration cannot be controlled by the Quebec government alot of the English affiliated communities, such as East Indians, Chinese, Greeks etc... sponsor their family members and naturally they will affiliate with the English speaking community when they come to Quebec.

IF a new province is created out of the minority dominated areas of Quebec. Quebec can pretty much select the vast majority of immigrants through its selection process who will be overwhelmingly French speaking

Well its up to them. The natives in James Bay would just say that the James Bay agreement is then null and void. So minus most of Montreal and then later on the Hydro electricity they already built that would have been under Quebecs control would be lost as well. Quebec would loose its transfer payments as well. Do they want to also loose freedom of movement to the rest of Canada? At that point I wouldn't care because it wouldn't effect the majority of the minorities in what use to be Quebec. Also the cold reality of actually paying for an independent country would also hit the pur laines. But as I mentioned before it would be up the Quebecois of what is left of Quebec to decide.

Jarry Steet - I don't get it - for partition to happen the question would clearly be - are you in or out of Canada? Being a new province in Canada is not even an option - there would be no reason for a referendum. What is left of Quebec would be a new country - without those who vote to remain Canadian.

Cutie what I am emphasizing is, that even if Quebec doesn't decide to leave they can keep the minorities under linguistic lockdown forever. So even if Quebec doesn't have a referendum for sovereignty or the movement dies, we will still have bill 101 hanging over our collective heads. Therefore a partition movement should not even be related to sovereignty or independence movement for Quebec. It should be started just to get the majority of the minorities out of Quebec linguistic control.

Editor, you talked about your friend Jean-Pierre: "that sovereigntist had a valid and legitimate dream, and although it is one that I didn't share, it was one that I could never again reject as illegitimate."

René Levesque had a noble dream and some great ideas. The problem is that people adopted his dream in order to fulfill their own selfish personal goals (think Parizeau, Marois).The separatist movement, which is irrelevant today, is kept alive by perpetuating the myth that the Québécois culture and the french language are in danger, which leads to xenophobia and plain old racism.

Really, how many separatists do you know like your friend Jean-Pierre, who aren't just scared of "les maudits anglais / immigrants / whatever"?

Editor: YIKES! I never pictured you playing the devil's advocate. In addition, reading the above comments by Ex Kaybecer are quite right about parts of the Eastern Townships, Laval, Montérégie and other pockets as well. The First Nations people of the north held their own referendum, or at least a plebiscite against going with Quebec should it decide to separate.

Berlin and the Germanies tore down their walls in 1989 and now parts of Canada have to put one up? Are we moving forward? I don't think so.

The best solution is still an all-or-none, winner-take-all solution, but then the war begins. In short, there is NO peaceful, amicable solution. Do realize the former Czechoslovakia was a much smaller country, they also, as mentioned above, had a much shorter relationship and finally unlike Quebec, they did not separate in the middle of the country. There are four provinces east of Quebec that are still a part of Canada. Partition will be hell, mostly for Quebec, but it would leave the Atlantic Provinces in angst until the whole mess is settled. I imagine the entire Baby Boom generation wouldn't be alive to see the solution.

If there is no continuity, it very much can and the people of the Atlantic Provinces don't deserve problems. I went out east on business trips several times. They were the best because of the way my associates tended to treat me. Almost always I was invited for a meal at their homes, and when you're on the road for 2-3 weeks at a time, a home-cooked meal is really welcome. I would take some of them out for dinners. The most sociable people in Canada, and I've dealt with Canadians from coast to coast.

In all fairness, I met wonderful people across the country, but the Easterners were #1 in my book, led by the Newfoundlanders! Comers to The Rock are like gold, and are often treated that way!

Yes, the Eastern people are far the best in our country and they deserve to have a corridor through this place to the ROC. I made many friends when I used to travel on business to the east coast and I couldn't agree more Mr. Sauga. They certainly haven't caused any of the problems that this stinking province have - they just want to live in peace and harmony with the ROC

Ripping Quebec out of Canada and Montreal out of Quebec are nothing more than facile quick-fixes that do more harm than good. No territorial reorganization is even necessary if the separatists just sat themselves on a comfy shrink's couch and worked out their issues. Live and let live is what this place needs, not more interventionist ethnolinguistic engineering by insecure and jealous political arrivistes.

Just as you shouldn't shop for food when you're hungry, we shouldn't make a rash decision based on emotion or a perceived slight. The sovereignists' "valid and legitimate" dream -- if it ever was so -- ceased to be as soon as their movement began to be tempered by "winning conditions" shenanigans. Tweaking the voting age, funnelling immigrant children into French schools by force in the hope of recruiting/brainwashing them into the cause, and catty "primacy" measures have been the undoing of this hubritic movement.

No, Editor. The sovereignist dream must continue its downward spiral because it is fueled not by a genuine need for self-determinism, but rather by a historical grudge against reality that its fanatical proponents refuse to accept. We are not in need of a new country any more than we ever were; we have a perfectly functional country in which all citizens are granted equality but which we obstinately refuse to operate (but which, curiously, are all too willing to use). we have allowed ourselves to believe the institutionalized and often frenzied fearmongering about our imminent destruction, internalizing it to such an extent that we refuse to affix our signature to a key document whose authority we recognize when convenient but otherwise not -- on the grounds that doing so would be tantamount to signing away any "balance of power" we have. We treat our linguistic English-speaking minority's presence not as valuable strength and fortuitous opportunity to build bridges with all our neighbors and a good part of the world, but rather as a persistent cancer whose complete eradication (we're way past neutering now) we bemoan the way a dying musician laments an unfinished symphony.

The sovereignist dream is fueled by a revanchist inferiority complex rooted in our mother country's pragmatic choice of spice, booze, and sugar cane over acres of snow on which its own people lived. A mother country all too willing, then as now, to seize upon terrible ambiguities to justify its own well-being while being insouciant to the suffering and difficulties it has created externally.

Despite periodic attempts at assimilation by the anglo element in this country, French has survived mostly due to a combination of francophones' relative isolation and their individual desire to keep the language alive. Without social networks and institutions, such assimilation would have been over and done with ages ago. The francophones' real work is to be done where virtually all the self-described "culture defenders" steadfastly refuse to do it -- outside Quebec. Natural assimilation and intermarriage has also done away with most English-speaking communities in Quebec outside Montreal, though how often will any Quebec provincial party display the intestinal fortitude to mention it even in passing?

Contrary to what you say, Editor, sovereignists and their movements purveyors have not accepted defeat graciously. They and their ideal is one of perpetual antagonism to the "evil" established order which, on balance, has not only enabled but permitted their -- our -- continued existence -- and in Quebec no less! It would seem to me that seen in this light, the slogan "until next time!" smacks of rather ungracious hooliganism, of the sort that bites the hand that feeds it.

Canada has two tiers of government specifically because in the years leading up to Confederation it was felt (by our own delegates!) that this was the way to guarantee Quebec's francophone and Catholic heritage within an otherwise mostly English-speaking and predominantly Protestant country. This was actually a condition WE imposed. From our country's very founding, the British North America act paved the way for provincial authorities' responsibilities in a number of key jurisdictions, many of them social and regional (as opposed to national and relatively broader) in nature.

Sovereignists have grown both fat and powerful under a system whose termination they now fight for. Committed secularists (at least in name), they have managed to combine vestigial remnants of Christian soul-saving rhetoric with jihad-like divinely-sanctioned purges against the "corrupting influence" of their ideological foes. Just like fundamentalists everywhere, their project is imbued with talk of a "grand project", "revolution", and subjugation of the main source of population growth (formerly women, now immigrants). To those who oppose them, it is a genteel modern form of the traditional convert-flee-or-die message (those who refuse to endorse the revolution, are reminded, "101 or 401"). To paraphrase George Brown, they are the ideological descendents of virulent French-Canadianism whose proponents have been denied nothing, who have barred everything they dislike, who have extorted all they have ever demanded, and who have -- in his day as in ours -- grown insolent over their "victories".

Separatism as has been articulated within our province's context is thus far from a dream I can simply choose to share or not. Contrary to what you say, Editor, it IS an illegitimate dogma because it is based less on genuine needs and more on provocation with a complementary level of government which its proponents are actually supposed to work with for the benefit of all citizens. Instead, we're told variety is wonderful except when it makes the nationalists uneasy, at which point less (linguistically, religiously) is more. We denounce similar (often bigoted) calls for homogeneity from English-speaking North America, yet the francophone Québécois counterpart isn't met with as much ridicule because it seems some endangered monkeys' yelps are more valuable than others.

On balance, francophones are far from being victims in this case. We already have control over all the levers we need to flourish. This is why I say that our province's separatist movement is not legitimate, Editor.

It must complete its slow descent into oblivion because its architects have shown themselves to be far more dishonest than the architects they purport to be "struggling against".

It must yield to emerging technologies that impose knowledge of more languages and especially English, exposing our children to the corrupting influence of this world language.

And if need be, it should accept that willful and wholesale abandonment of our language is a natural and equally legitimate process that Quebecers must be free to adopt, just as we abandoned the Church. Not accepting this (which it hasn't) exposes the separatist movement's francosupremacist double-standard for the fraud that it is.

The spirit of our against-the-current language legislation is that no one should need to learn English once we've artificially reworked society to be French-only.

I submit to you a more lucid notion: that there be no need to redraw the map of Quebec if all we need are a few more decades to allow more Quebecers to awaken themselves to the massive fraud that our authorities have perpetrated against us since 1760 and decide whether to endorse or abandon the nationalists' narrative. If it happened with Creation and more broadly with religion, I don't see why or how it couldn't also happen linguistically and/or constitutionally.

Bravo, Apparatchik! You've really outdone yourself this time. I did think the Editor’s post was very sensible in a “giving-up” kind of a way but you’ve given me a pause to think about that.

I’m sure you know perfectly well that separatists are not at all interested in sitting down in the comfy shrink’s couch to work out their issues. You are eminently sensible in stating that “interventionist ethnolinguistic engineering by insecure and jealous political arrivistes” is unnecessary and yet they have somehow managed to convert a minority into believing that this will solve all of their ills. It is obvious that tweaking the voting age and Malavoy’s intended brainwashing of schoolchildren is meant to try to eke out the slimmest of majorities for their plan.

The sovereignist dream must continue its downward spiral because it is fueled not by a genuine need for self-determinism, but rather by a historical grudge against reality that its fanatical proponents refuse to accept.

This.

We treat our linguistic English-speaking minority's presence not as valuable strength and fortuitous opportunity to build bridges with all our neighbors and a good part of the world, but rather as a persistent cancer whose complete eradication […] we bemoan […].

And this.

Contrary to what you say, Editor, sovereignists and their movements purveyors have not accepted defeat graciously.

To those who oppose them, it is a genteel modern form of the traditional convert-flee-or-die message (those who refuse to endorse the revolution, are reminded, "101 or 401"). (Such insouciance to the majority of Quebecers!)

This too. The purpose of referenda is to make a decision, not to keep repeating it until the “right” decision is made. Scotland has learned from Quebec’s experience that this is not the way to go and they desperately want to avoid a neverendum.

However, if you think Quebecers will “awaken within a few decades to the massive fraud that our authorities have perpetrated against us since 1760”, this most unfortunately still has not occurred amongst creationists even after 2000 years. It appears to be a fact of human nature that some people will choose to believe whatever they want to believe regardless of anything that may contradict their beliefs, come what may.

Take a gold star out of the teacher's desk! Good essay/hypothesis. The Cat draws an assist with the last paragraph. I have written time and time again in this blog that it's human nature to see what we want to see, hear what we want to hear and believe what we want to believe. Some of us are more open-minded than others, but we're all guilty of this to some degree. Again, this is indeed human nature.

Perhaps Scotland has learned from the Quebec experience and the intelligence of individuals is measured by learning from one's own mistakes and even more so by the mistakes of others; however, there comes a point where enough is enough, and I think it's time to punish Quebec for biting the hand that feeds it. In light of the endless and nauseating haranguing by successive Quebec governments and various elements of said society, I think it justified to cut off equalization payments. It's about time to tell Quebec to s**t or get off the pot. The Quebec debt clock is past $254.3 billion and should hit $255 billion within a month.

Former premier, John James "Goldilocks" Charest initially said he would reduce the size of the civil service - it grew instead. All the debt level did was grow. Pauline Marois has no interest in watching the debt so while the $200 medicare premium will be be cut or eliminated as will tuition fee increases, that $255 billion may come even sooner. Can't wait to see what idiotic budget measures the PQ will come up with, and defeat their government.

Beautiful piece of work, Apparatchik. Realistically, I don't think partitioning would work anyway. Does anyone really believe that the separatists in an independent, partitioned Quebec would rest as long as Montreal and/or other parts of the province remained with Canada? That they'd settle down and be content with what they'd got? Not a chance. They'd view the initial separation/partition as the foot in the door, the starting point for the full province and there would be no peace for the ROC or Montrealers. It's got to be all or none, in or out. This thing is never going away.

Well you can bet that the deficit will not go down with a PQ Government that is only interested in hiring language police and creating government departments that do the same work in Ottawa, regardless of how much money it costs. It's obvious their agenda to punish the Anglos and Allos is all they care about - not money. We are so bankrupt and headed even further down - I don't know if we will ever get out but not with the PQ policies, that's for sure. We should be interested in attracting business and people to live here and all we do is drive them away with their stupid "French" only agenda, no matter what. Don't ever make anyone feel welcome and a part of their society - that's against the pure laine philosophy of the ignorant PQs.

Diogenes - Wow - what a defeatist attitude - Why would there have to be problems if the vote is democratic and recognized by all of us? Why should these separatists be allowed to abscond with Canadian territory without a "how do you do" and we are not to fight back? What the hell is the matter with us - are we all too cowardly to stand up for what we believe in? Geez guys, if we can find a way around this without giving all or none, why are we not doing that? Do you think I will sit back and let my property be confiscated by these bankrupt, language zealots who have never paid a cent of my property tax but want my land? Not a chance. It's not "all or none" as far as I'm concerned and I hope 99% of you feel the same. I'm sick of these people holding me hostage for their own selfish means to an end and I refuse to believe that we Canadians are not going to stand up for our rights!

"Sovereignists have grown both fat and powerful under a system whose termination they now fight for."

Yet another paradox in addition to the one I described below where antagonistic and inflammatory tones towards Canada in order to create fertile grounds for secession go hand in hand with conciliatory and mitigating tones in order to assure economic cooperation in the future (The geo-politics of North America do not leave many alternatives for partnerships, thus producing the "secessionist-associationist" schizophrenia)

This movement is forever lost in a barrage of contradictions. It takes a step forward only to take one back. Even when it manages to inflame passions for a new country at fever pitch (as in 1995), it will still come back with a soft run-on sentence loaded with references to Canada. The aim seems to be not on creating a country, but more on creating a certain type of atmosphere.

"Why would there have to be problems if the vote is democratic and recognized by all of us?" Seriously, Cutie? I think you're being a little naive. There have been 2 referendums in the past 30-odd years, both of which, you'll recall, the separatists lost. Weren't they democratic and recognized? Now, either one of those should have put an end to sovereignist dreams and yet, here we are. Sorry, but I just can't see partitioning as being the panacea that you do. If they get a partial victory it's just going to whet their appetite for more. Sometimes being a realist is going to sound defeatist.

The problem with your statement is that - it wasn't a "vote" to begin with, it wasn't a clear question, it wasn't a clear majority and it wasn't recognized by all of us (at least not by the separatists). If all of the above were recognized as a defeat by the separatists, the constitution would now be signed. It was strictly an opinion by the people of Quebec that they deserved a better deal from Canada. It was only after the referendum that Parizeau told the people he had intended to pull Quebec from Canada has they not been defeated. Many francophones felt very betrayed when they learned that he had tricked them. That cannot be repeated and that's why there wasn't much fuss from them when the Clarity Act came into effect.

@Editor - Just removing Montreal from Quebec would not be a solution to the problem as there are many areas of Quebec that are Canadian and deserve the same option to be a part of Canada as Montreal. The natives, for example, certainly have the right to remain Canadian and what about us here in the Pontiac? We are Canadian. I still say the only democratic and reasonable way out of this mess is a referendum in each of the 75 federal districts using the Clarity Act rules and those that vote to stay - stay - the rest form a new quebec with whatever territory decides to stay with them. There is no other solution except perhaps another 100 years of the same push/pull politics but with a possibility of all of us being voted out by the ROC.

Actually, Cutie, Quebec would have to split the referendum amongst its 125 provincial electoral districts. BTW, Quebec now has 78 federal electoral districts, or will once the legislation passes. Your proposal would create a checkerboard jurisdiction, and how would that work where districts that vote "no" are landlocked and surrounded by adjacent districts that vote "yes" and vice versa?

As I wrote above, Quebec will go through hell over this, but fighting Canada all these years is where karma is the ultimate bitch in the end. It's not as if Canada as well won't be affected, especially the Atlantic Provinces, but Quebec will do the lion's share of the suffering. Too bad there are imbeciles who see the fight as worthwhile.

Bravo Editor! It seems to me like a lot of the naysayers are quite happy to put up with the current crap and moan, but God forbid something is done to address the actual problem. Remember folks: perfect is the enemy of good. Looking for a perfect solution will leave everything unsolved and the status quo will remain. Yes, there are pockets of anglophones here and there. Yes, the Outauais (if I spelled that correctly) may or may not be joining - and I maintain that the Ottawa region in Ontario would be better off joining forces as it's another heavily bilingual area, unlike the rest of Ontario (I know, Sudbury too... but it's too far to make sense). And no: there aren't that many anglophones left in the Townships: 5 five thousand of them in Sherbrooke and less than that anywhere else are (sorry to say that) as relevant as Francophone Calgarians.

But, in the end: if you want a share of the pie, you've got to ask for it, not just wait and hope that the other side feels generous enough to offer you some. When you have a juxtapposing position you can negotiate. If you only just keep begging your playground bully to stop being mean, apart from amusing him, you get more of the same. If the offer on the table is not good enough for the PQ and its supporters, then it's up to them to reject it and expose their position (and their weakness!). More importantly: once there is another political subject demanding something they are opposed to, they will have to tread very carefully with their apartheid-lite policies as they will no longer be considered (as they are now, however unfairly) in a historical context of righting some ancient wrongs, but in a political context of bullying an actual political opposition, something that can much more easily backfire on them.

Having bilingual parts of Eastern and Northeastern Ontario join a new province would be a good idea. Even Sudbury would be feasible because boundaries can be adjusted. South of Sudbury would probably stay in Ontario and they would still have a land corridor to Northwest Ontario. Sherbrooke and most of the townships don't have many non francophones but the southern townships next to the US border has a concentration, so does South of the Chateauguay valley places like Hemmingford. in between you would have lacolle, but adjustments can me made to have it contiguous with Akwasasne.

Not entirely convinced by the second part of your argument, as those areas are scarsely populated, but you do make a good job of reinforcing my original argument: if you want a fair solution, first of all you need a commitment to put the solution forward. If you look into the details long enough, you can find an accommodation that leaves the least number of people unhappy. However, if you (well, all of us) just sit around the table deciding not to put a single foot forward until each and every potential grievance is ironed out, you'll find that the table is gone and you are not so kindly asked to leave the room.

One more thing I'd like to add: whether the remaining Francophone Quebec province decides to stay or leave Canada, I see no good reason to impose punitive conditions like strict passport controls or Berlin-style walls. I always maintain that the only real difference should be how far the OQLF's officers cars can drive and the elevation of English as JOINT Official language where those cars can't drive (well, not with any authority, anyway). Montreal being what it is, there will always be people and families living in and out of the new borders: it happens between Ottawa and Gatineau, and that doesn't seem to be much of a problem (spare me sob stories about medical services: it's not really that big a problem!)

We have a problem (Canadians) in that it seems there are very few of us that are willing to fight for what we believe in - fair and equitable treatment living in this stinking province. Perhaps if enough of us stop being so pussy, we could get somewhere. Stop apologizing for who and what we are - we deserve the same rights and respect as any other Canadian in this country. People should be writing as many letters and articles as they can and objecting to this second class citizen treatment that we put up with on a daily basis. I'm getting to the point where I believe that the Real Canadians have already left this doomed place deliberately to let it die a slow and painful death.

Yes, I know it could create a "checker-board" effect - that could also influence some of the voters in the areas that would be part of such an outcome. Would they want to be surrounded by a Federal border? May make them think twice about how to vote. Why would we want 125 provincial electoral district referendums when we're deciding about who stays in Canada? This is Federal Government jurisdiction. If this could be done, I would hope that the "new federal districts" would not come to be and the legislation approving these seats never pass. I feel Quebec has more than enough seats in the House of Commons and does not need more to create even more havoc in the country. This solution would probably create a corridor for the Atlantic Provinces as well as most of the areas along the seaway are federal voters. I know along the Ottawa River they are federal supporters.

"On the trip we got around to talking politics where he explained that he didn't hate Canada or Anglophones, he just wanted his own country where he could enjoy a francophone Quebecois brand of culture without the imposition of anglophone politics, values and culture."

He's not telling you the truth, knowing that the truth would expose his hubris.

Jean Pierre knows well that the imposition of the anglo culture is a soft kind of imposition, not through any direct coercion, but indirect effects of mass culture. As such, it cannot be regulated, unless QC leaves planet earth. The hard imposition, the one you can regulate, adjust, and apply with coercion, is actually working in favor of French, and is designed to stem the effects of external influences. So in an independent QC, anything that's coming in now would be coming in then. Also, where he's talking about being able to "enjoy his culture", in a context where he can already enjoy it fully and completely, totally unopposed, unchallenged, and un-ridiculed, what he really means is that he wants to enjoy it without any "noise" coming from other cultures that he has to coexist with. He is an ethnic nationalist, in other words.

What Jean Pierre denounces, he essentially projects. He denounces having something imposed on him, while in fact he's the one who wants to impose on others. The reason why he wants a country is for precisely the same reason as all "sovereignists" do (and won't tell you) - it has to do with a belief that a state will provide extra tools for imposition of your will on others internally, and externally as well to an extent. The paradox here is that in order to be good at imposing, the country has to be strong and economically viable, which for QC requires a close relationship with the rest of Canada for economic exchange, market sharing, and mutual financial help in the moments of crisis. This is the paradox that gave rise to the schizophrenic concept of "sovereignty-association", essentially a contradiction where you antagonize and endear a country all at the same time. Most QC "sovereignists" are stuck in this contradiction, and walk around like schizophrenic zombies, not being able to clarify their goals, since these goals are essentially un-clarifiable.

Very well written and elegant piece..kudos to the editor. However as I have said before there is no way you are going to get the seperatists to agree to giving up the largest city in Quebec. Montreal is the economic centre of Quebec by a huge margin..how could you possibly expect them to just give it up?? You make is sound so simple but in reality it would just open up a huge can of worms and make an already lengthy and complicated process even more complicated. This proposition is just going to stir up anger among francophones against the anglophone community. They are already conditioned to fear the threat of english and now we are going to suggest that we takeover all of Montreal and perhaps the eastern townships and the gatineau??? How is this going to placate them..if anything it will make them even more distrustful of us and I cant really blame them.

This is an incredibly convenient solution for anglophones as it essentially gives all the power over to us..we would have incredible clout in such an entity. Francophones living within this new province would likely be very concerned about the future of their language as they would now be in a anglo dominated zone and we all know how francophones have done in the rest of Canada.

Its a nice pipe dream for the anglos..but it wont happen and it actually would likely make things worse. I dont see you getting widespread support for this and most people will not view it as realistic.

"How is this going to placate them..if anything it will make them even more distrustful of us and I cant really blame them. "

Nothing you do can make them trustful of you. Those who create mistrust are too powerful, and your every effort at creating trust (by way of "placating" for example) is countered with a massive propaganda apparatus that creates mistrust.

Mistrust will continue to be created because it serves a purpose. And the attempts at calming the un-calm (held in a perpetual state of un-calmness) is exactly the response they try to elicit in you. You're essentially a fireman trying to put out fires that are started at a frequency you can't handle.

The fires will keep burning until people learn to identify the arsonists. Seeing a fireman here and there is nice, but not nearly enough, so your efforts of placating are a total waste of time.

Complicated, francophones are fractionally less numerous in Montreal than anglos and ethnics combined. Who do you think would decide what Montreal would do? The rest of Quebec? The notion is laughable, it would be like the RoC deciding which policies Quebec should implement.

Besides, as much as sovereigntists think they're big and threatening to the RoC, the federal view on the matter is one of indifference because they're secure in the knowledge that since secessionists have little popular support (especially due to an idiot separatist government) and thus will never happen.

If it did (however unlikely) their stance would be that if Canada is divisible, so too is Quebec. If Quebec were to leave, they would leave as they entered Confederation: no St-Lawrence seaway and no Grand Nord, as these are lands accorded to the province thanks to the federal government. It's ridiculous to think that Quebec would have a say in the matter, the ultimate decision rests with the federales. How and who would decide what remains Canadian and what stays Quebecois would be up to the federal government, but we will never see this so it doesn't really matter.

Also, Montreal is a hub of international trade and multiculturalism. While many a zealous ethnic nationalist/separatist lives in the East end, the fact of the matter is that there are more anglos and allos than there are francophones, thus if it were to be put to the vote, Montreal would remain Canadian. Think of it from an economic perspective: if you were to give the city the option of having access to the vast Canadian market and retain a Canadian standard of living, or live in a new "country" ridden with poverty and squalor and francosupremacy, what do you think the economic capital of Quebec would decide? It would be a mass exodus of francophones for a change.

Nevertheless, arguing for partition is pointless, as I agree that the best anglos can hope for is the indifference of the Charest period. I personally don't care, because if moronic, backwards francosupremacist sovereigntists (of which there are no other kind) keep getting elected, I will be able to remain condescending and feel superior for as long as I live.

The real solution to the problem would be to elect a government which did not pander to the ethnic nationalists, sovereigntists, but rather to the business sector. While such a government doesn't exist yet, and wouldn't be elected, it would be nice for us not to have to focus on pointless and irrelevant arguments over culture and language. It's like arguing with a religious fundamentalist, you won't be able to change their viewpoint no matter how wrong they are; so it'd be best to move on. If they want to remain stuck in the past, let it be so.

And as a side note, Y.L, your choice of display picture is interesting. It demonstrates how little you know about les patriotes, especially if you think that they are a symbol of linguistic purity or independance, of which they are neither, much like how St-Jean Baptiste really has nothing to do with sovereignty.

I also wish to add that I am personally more left-oriented, and normally would abhor a government pandering to the private sector above all else, I would rather see a right-wing business oriented government elected, as at least they would be equally indifferent and impersonal to both francophones and anglophones. It would be nice to have focus on something other than petty language politics for a year or two, just for a change.

I feel this way because within the current political framework of Quebec, all the parties which are so-called "left" are secessionist, therefore completely goddamned incompetent in where they assign their priorities. Anyone who believes that they should deal with language & culture first and everything else second doesn't deserve to be near a public office in my opinion.

The CAQ is very business-oriented, but as a new party I don't trust them enough not to revert to pandering to separatists and francosupremacists, much like Bourassa's Liberals did. Even though I voted for them, I only did it to deny the PQ a vote, which I considered my civic duty.

Even better, the Conservatives are also thinking of a new provincial party. Someone has to be able to get the books in order. Money has to stop being spent on useless things like language police and duplicating costs that are generally picked up by the Feds. We don't have the money to keep piddling it away on such things. I realize that left-wing is the way that most Quebecers vote but we are going to be officially bankrupt very, very soon if we don't put the brakes on the unions and stuff we don't really need.

@Foremost : "Ethnics" are not all on one side. They clearly don't identify themselves with Monsieur Tremblay du Lac St-Jean, but they don't have a strong "canadian" or "anglo-quebecer" identity either.

I am asking because as an 'ethnic' I am constantly in touch with them. And the vast majority would:

1. vote against separation2. would leave in case of quebec's secession3. are pro-partition as identified in the article above.

I am fully aware that my conclusions are not based on a wide survey, however I dare to believe that yours are not either.

After the PQ win, I have been surprised to see that many anti-separation opinions. Even from 'ethnics' that seemed to be "pro" right after they arrived here. I guess more than 3 years of living quebec changes an ethnic's point of view.

As a side note, a personal observation, a bigger proportion of allos from South America might be more inclined to agree with quebec's secession than others. And again, a personal observation, most of the ethnics that have businesses here are against separation.

"Ethnics" are not all on one side. They clearly don't identify themselves with Monsieur Tremblay du Lac St-Jean, but they don't have a strong "canadian" or "anglo-quebecer" identity either."

Politically, most Ethnics are federalist. Whether they love, like, or are just ok with Canada, Canada is the country they immigrated to, the country of their choice. Quebec would be something new, something not yet vetted, something that did not pass the test yet, something that would need time to grow on people, to prove itself. And QC's brand of ethnic nationalism certainly does not help QC's case, it does not create trust nor a positive outlook for the future.

The range of feelings towards QC and Canada varies amongst my fellow Ethnics (I am one of them too). For Canada, I noticed the following range: from passionate attachment (more Canadian than Canadians themselves) to approving or slightly critical indifference. For QC, the range is: from mildly positive view on one end to outright hostility on the other end. The spectrum for QC is shifted way to the negative side vis a vis Canada.

Note that I'm talking about Ethnics who did not spend early formative years in QC (at best they entered it at the level of high school, and at that point the mind is already shaped a certain way and is harder to bend). But there are Ethnic children who are going through the QC system from the very start of their lives, so the general attitude might shift more in favor of QC for this generation. Or maybe not (Sugar Sammy). Time will tell.

@TS @Adski : I grew up in Montreal and went to school with a bunch of, mostly, second generation immigrants.

I know most of them would vote against separation, but I wouldn't call them federalist. If they are federalist, it's by default. I just feel like there is a a general indifference to the RoC among people of my generation.

It's part of the history books like all the things that happened before our birth. You'll have to come up with better arguments to explain your political views in 2012, especially if you are under the age of 25. It's too easy to single out one event in history books to make the federalists or the sovereigntists look bad.

Sovereingtists don't need any of my help to look bad, Guillaume. Your current government is doing a fine job on its own at the moment.

However, don't think that my comment about Parizeau's "money and the ethnic vote" should be taken as a mere soundbite used as justification: it's not so much about Parizeau's words in themselves, but rather that Parizeau's drunken rage was (and is, in some cases) representative of the rampant xenophobia and frustration many Quebecers feel.

In short, loads of Quebecers simply don't like others. Their dislike can range from outright hostility to total indifference, but Quebec is not a very outsider friendly place to live.

Some people like to say "oh our generation is much more tolerant than the old guard" but the thin is that our generation is taught and conditioned by the old guard. I know just as many indifferent francophones as I do ardent separatists, and the racism factor is completely independent of political belief.

Now don't get me wrong: for every xenophobic militant there is a good Quebecer who is very live-and-let-live, but these calm, quiet and content Quebecers don't make the news.

Take the paramedic refusing to speak English thing. The RoC turns on its television and sees that, stories like that a few dozen times a year. This is the image they get of Quebec, because many of them never come here and meet people.

The extremist minority is allowed to form the image of Quebec that the RoC has, and yet Quebecers wonder why the RoC hates them on principle? Of course it's deplorable, but you have to realize that Quebecers do fuck all to dissuade anyone that they're not all crazy francosupremacist, separatist, xenophobes.

"I know most of them would vote against separation, but I wouldn't call them federalist. If they are federalist, it's by default. I just feel like there is a a general indifference to the RoC among people of my generation. "

Politically, voting against separation is exactly being a federalist. Unless you redefine "federalist" to mean some emotional attachment to Canada, then yes, it gets more complicated. Because in many cases there is no emotional attachment, but more of a dislike for QC's ethnic nationalism coupled with attraction to the economic stability that united Canada offers.

If they're federalist "by default", it speaks even worse for QC. It's one thing to be a political federalist "by love of Canada", it's another thing to be a political federalist because the prospect of an independent QC induces convolutions in you.

Re: general indifference to the RoC - I buy it because it describes me perfectly. Though I did meet Ethnics more Canadian that Canadians themselves, the only thing missing is a tattoo of a maple leaf on their ass, and I must admit this overt patriotism to a country you're not even from rubs me the wrong way. There's an element of "patheticness" in it, just like there is an element of it in the "more Quebecois than the Quebecois" attitude that I'm sure exists also amongst some rare immigrants.

Well explained adski - that is exactly what is going on. Those that want to live in isolation are making decisions for the mainstream population of this province and they have to take their heads out of the sand. There will never be peace and/or prosperity in this place until they are made to let go of the rest of the world. When they realize this and there is no more money in the coffers, they will finally be pushed to face the truth - they cannot survive by themselves! We have to consider how best to partition this place and let those areas go that want to go.

yada yada yada cutie. You really are stuck on the partition idea. It seems to me that its the anglos who lost the battle back in 1976 and the smart ones realized this and left. The other ones are still stubbornly clinging on to some pipe dream of partition or hoping that the feds will save them. The sad reality is that anglos are totally outnumbered in this province..all the political parties more or less ignore us because we are such a small group. The feds will continue to ignore us because we are of no importance to them and they need to try and get on the good side of the majority francophones. Hence its time to wake up and smell the coffee..things are at best going to go back to the charest indifference years. At worst we will end up with a majority PQ government that will really try to make anglos lives miserable. Partition is a total waste of time..even most anglos dont take it seriously. If you all want to put effort into something attainable then I would do whatever it takes to make sure the PQ dont win the next election.

Yada yada to you also - that's all you do is whine and live in the past - IT'S TIME FOR A CHANGE AFTER NEARLY 40 YEARS OF THIS AND IF PEOPLE LIKE YOU DON'T WANT TO CHANGE STAY WHERE YOU ARE AND VOTE FOR THE PQ. After listening to you for the past couple of months, you are a separatist and just here to annoy anyone trying to resolve the problems in this province. You are not a Canadian, that's for sure. Suck your thumb all you want.

Complicated and Foremost want to do nothing to change the way things are and I guess I can live with that. I will have the same courtesy for them and skip the history lessons that they always put forth as to whose to blame for what and when it happened. I will read the comments that are made by other contributors who may or may not have suggestions as to how to get the Canadians out of this mess created by these separatists so that we can go on and flourish as a nation instead of rotting on the land on which we reside.

Cuties, partition would only be considered if Quebec were overwhelmingly in support of independence: something that won't happen.

It is much better and less hassle for everyone if we keep the status quo with regards to borders. More importantly, most of Quebec (to the tune of 70%) don't support independence, which demonstrates their desire to remain within Canada.

Why even bother with partition? There is no good reason to do so at the moment. Plus, both the federal and provincial government would have to be on board. Seeing as how the current Qc gov't is "all or nothing" they'll have to settle with nothing, because they know they won't be separating.

I believe in partition as a last-resort reaction to imminent secession, something that won't happen in your lifetime or mine.

My main beef with your comments are your improper use of capitalisation and incessant harping about a skewed view of partition as an ultimate solution. I bear you no ill will!

And by the way complicated - It would be nice, just for a change after 35 years, if the Anglophones were in power and, as I've said before, a BILINGUAL PROVINCE WHEREBY THE FRENCH LANGUAGE IS PROTECTED IS WHAT WE SHOULD BE AIMING FOR WITH PARTITION!

Foremost - Agree with a lot of what you say. Even though the island of Montreal is more anglo/allophone the metro region is clearly francophoone majority and many of these off islanders work on the island of Montreal. Hence turning Montreal into another province with the anglos in the majority or even near majority would be a no go. Do you honestly believe that francophones would just shrug and say ``well maybe they have a point..oohh just give them Montreal and we will keep the rest``. It would be like Ontario giving up Toronto..its the economic centre of all of Quebec!!!

Most francophones want Montreal to become more french and they want to keep Montreal. And they are in the clear majority so all this talk about partition is a moot point.

Its time to fight a winnable battle..like stopping the PQ from winning the next election..thats a winnable battle and that will help tone down the tensions a lot. Partition isnt even on the radar..we dont even know when or if there will be another referendum.

I feel so sad reading your words and knowing this is how you think, you know as well as I do they hate us, they show it with contempt for anything in English, I mean really they're going after the Gap (it's not English or French it's a three letter trademark?) It's almost like you have Stockholm syndrome. Anyway just as much as she thinks she can introduce a citizen initiated referendum so can we start a drive to partition.

The first steps should be soon if not are already underway, we need to take our cues and strategies from the organizers from the federal parties or those down in the US, grassroots and build up a message that they cannot ignore, you cannot just wipe English from the slate in Quebec we belong here just as much as anyone else who was born here.

For all that I condemn the use of Nazi imagery when discussing the PQ, the Nazis usually referred to whichever state/population they wanted to get rid of as "the ______ problem", such as for instance the Czech or Polish problem prior to the dismantling of their states.

Usage of that kind of wording is a step on the bad direction, even for "federalist" parties.

You're absolutely correct Yannick. At first when I saw these instances, I too made the Nazi, ethnic nationalist connection, but then I thought about it and realized that in the case of several of the parties CAQ/Liberals specifically, they were just politicians being politicians: saying whatever they want in order to convince people to vote for them.

To them, there's no harm in pointing out that they'll fix "the problem of English in Montreal" because the potential voting gain from anglophobes is greater than the anglo vote anyway, which many parties know they won't be getting. Parties like the Liberals and CAQ don't actually plan on doing anything about it anyway, unless it becomes advantageous to them politically.

Obviously this is not the case with the PQ, but nevertheless, I wasn't all that worried.

Geoffrey - I dont disagree with you but I think partition is a very low probability event..close to zero in my opinion. I am a realist not a dreamer..we are about 15 percent of the population here..how exactly are we going to force the issue? Even the Quebec Liberals ignore us and yet we still vote for them time after time!! The reality is that any government in Quebec will at best be indifferent to us and in a worst case will continue to take away rights from anglophones. I personally think the PQ want to drive more anglophones out of Quebec to make it easier for them to win a referendum.

How many anglophones are on the street protesting..most anglophones are just hoping that things dont get worse. If we were 30 or 40 percent of the population then maybe we would have a shot but our numbers are too low. Plus the anglophone population is aging rapidly..many young anglophones leave this province and I dont blame them.

Don't stop with the push Geoffrey - We need to keep the pressure on for a new party that is willing to take up the cause for partition to settle this issue without causing any more angst for the Canadians that reside in this province and to stop the separatists from removing any more rights of its citizens. We have a lot of taxation without representation and, that alone, is enough to make us want to leave this sinking province. By the way, complicated is totally wrong - Canadians are at least 50% of the population of Quebec, this including many, many francophones that are, at heart, Canadian first, province second. When given a choice as to whether to remain Canadian or to live in isolation as a new country, they will vote to remain Canadian in a new bilingual province.

I dont disagree with the fact that many francophones would vote to stay in Canada. But that doesnt mean they will accept Montreal and other areas seperating from Quebec..thats a big stretch. These moderate francophones want things to stay more or less the same..splitting up Quebec would not go over well with them especially given that the anglos would have a much higher weighting possibly a majority. So how exactly is partition going to happen if we cant even get support going for seperation?? The support for seperation is at 28 percent now !!! It seems that any referendum is years away..

No. It's not all black or white! They might be Canadian but they aren't willing to accept those kinds of concessions. Some "Canadians" could vote against partition due to simple reasons like not wanting to live in a different countries than their family, their friends, their neighbors etc.

I don't care that they vote PQ - I find it deplorable that they get paid to train to protect Canada but are willing to put their names and faces on a document to start a revolution. I don't know how you can be so close to treason and not be officially charged with it.

Yannick, it's not so much voting PQ as being a separatist. I agree that discriminating against someone based on their political beliefs is wrong, but it is equally wrong to allow someone who hates the country they've signed up to protect to enlist in the first place. How can we be sure these people can be counted on?

People like this join because they've nowhere else to go, and the Armed Forces takes care of them, the Canadian Armed Forces. They take what they need from the Federal and leave, which is a pretty good example of the separatist Quebecois mentality.

If you're a separatist and a member of the Armed Forces, that's a serious conflict of interest, and very much incompatible with Peace, Order and Good Government.

I really sympathize with the point of view Foremost, it's a HUGE conflict of interest. My problem is this :every time I try to run in my head how you would weed out separatists from the army, the only scenarios that come to mind is figuring out what parties they voted for, listening to their opinions, etc... and they remind me too much of MacArthysm to seem feasible.

How do you figure to do it? Ask people "Do you believe in an independant Quebec" when they sign in, and refuse those who say yes? Well you could, but they'd probably just lie, just like when they swear allegiance to the Queen.

And I'm sure some people's political opinions change over time. Who knows if some veterans don't become separatists at the end of their military career?

Again absolutely correct. I didn't even try to propose to "weed out" separatists: it is impossible, and would only foster resentment.

And I'm sure some people's political opinions change over time. Who knows if some veterans don't become separatists at the end of their military career?

This. On the flip side, for every one who is discharged a separatist, I'm sure there's a separatist who gets discharged a federalist (or at least indifferent). To be honest I just find separatists in the military unfortunate, not a pressing issue.

As fanatical as those separatists are, they are well aware that Montreal is the economic engine of the province. And speaking of Montreal as an economic engine, certainly the part West of the Main is economically more developed that the one East of the Main.

Outside Montreal region, Quebec is basically rural with few big urban spots. However, the rural areas certainly need services from the city. Farmers, miners, fishermen certainly need financing, supplies and distribution. If not from Montreal, where else can they get those services domestically, not to mention en francais? Quebec City and Sherbrooke (I assume Gatineau, Laval and Monteregie will get partitioned also) are simply not adequate to provide such services.

I'm sorry, I disagree: Montreal is a benefit claimant, gangs and mob-ridden black hole and anyone with two neurons to rub together would choose Hydro-Quebec over Montreal any day. Not one single business based in Montreal, including the ones run by Francophones, has a guaranteed future, in Montreal or anywhere else. Hydro-Quebec supplies 20% of North America with energy from a renewable source in a world of shrinking resources. Montreal has its charms, but it's teetering on the edge: the smart money goes elsewhere: while the cultural argument has some (limited) traction, the economic argument goes nowhere: Montreal's taxes go to Montreal, and then some Equalisation payments, and then some of the Hydro-Quebec revenue and provincial taxes from the rest of Quebec. Montreal is a nett-taker from Quebec, not the other way around.

I don;t think Quebec would mind making its own stock market in the Eastern part of Montreal and moving its hydro Quebec building east. If Quebec was partitioned they would just move its administrative headquarters either to the eastern part of Montreal or some smaller city in Quebec.

After 35 years of bill 101 that has already caused so much damage to Montreals' economy I don't think Quebec would really care whether a little less then half of the Montreal metro area is no longer in Quebec. If there was freedom of movement as there is between provinces it wouldn't really matter to Quebec. Most of the Francophones in the suburbs and Southeast of Montreal would continue commuting to Montreal and areas of the new province like before. In fact Montreal would boom without any linguistic shackles and in all likelihood become a have province, despite the billions it would need to spend on deteriorating infrastructure. Then you have to remember that Quebec would be able to recieve more in equalization.

On a separate note, separatists usually like to tell us to obey the laws, right? Well, let us go back to the case of six American companies vs OQLF. In an interview with SRC, Mario Beaulieu clearly states that compliance with the standing laws in not enough. Companies must also take care of the wishes of his and of others' like his.

The SSJB is deliberately trying to make itself look ridiculous (and Quebec look stupid) once again; that's got to be the only reason for Beaulieu to be complaining about Hallowe'en witches that only speak English. And he has some cheek, complaining about how it feels to have one’s language treated as second-class!

Joe and Michael Malko Ghaled try out a witch that speaks English only in the rays of the Party Expert store in Montreal. [Note: Again with inanimate objects being referred to as being “anglophone” in the French press!!!]

On the eve of Hallowe’en, zombie and witch decorations that speak are out terrorizing ... in English only.

"Since these products are available on the market, there should be versions in French and English. I find it deplorable to be flooded by products in English," says Mario Beaulieu, president of the Saint-Jean-Baptiste Society of Montreal.

According to him, unilingual anglophone figurines should not be tolerated by consumers, and even less by the Office of the French language.

The Charter of the French language is clear: "It is prohibited in the Quebec market to have toys and games [...] whose operation requires the use of a vocabulary other than French," unless the object is "cultural" so that the object would be distorted by the use of a language other than the original language. Moreover, Canadian Tire had to withdraw their talking witches.

At Party Expert, where they sell this kind of decoration less than 10 days away from Halloween, they don’t make much of a fuss regarding the unilingual figurines. "This is the language of business!" says Joe Malko, a salesman. Since the material comes from the United States, it is not so surprising that the products sold do not comply with the Charter. And since customers aren’t complaining, there is really no reason to worry, he said.

Second-class language

"When products are in English only, it gives off the message that the French language in Quebec is secondary, one feels relegated to being second class," says Mario Beaulieu. He compares the situation to that of a bad translation of a product: "People feel that Montreal is anglicizing itself, it raises a concern, and people become more emotional."

For Mario Beaulieu, there still is hope: "If every citizen took the time to buy in French only, then the shops would adapt. We must denounce these situations and I think we'll get there. Popular pressure is influential. "

Like Tony Kondaks wrote, let the market decide for itself. If the demand is there, certainly the merchants will do what they can to satisfy their customers. However, forcing the merchants by legislation to stock customized things only on sale once a year, which their consumers may not care much, is very much unfair.

I know. I don't really blame a ma and pa operation that clumsily runs their english text through google translate, after all they probably have zero francophone customers and don't have the profit margins to justify hiring someone (and official translations can be quire onerous). I'm just agreeing with the sentiment that this makes one feel invisible - the same way an anglophone in Quebec feels when he has to listen to five minutes of yammering to hear "for service in English press 9", I assume.

One wonders though, why there isn't a middle ground before google translate and 200$ an hour official translation. No university student outside of french immersion trying to make some extra dough by advertising on kijiji? I guess people think that if they're going to put any effort into it at all, they better do it right. I'd take a 20$ translation over that atrocity, though.

VAUDREUIL-DORION, Que. - A couple in Vaudreuil is furious after a paramedic started a language debate as their young daughter was convulsing in front of them.

Mark Bergeron can hardly believe that just 48 hours ago, while visiting relatives down the street, he had a brush with disaster when his two-year-old daughter Ella, went into a febrile seizure. "She was staring off in the distance and not responding," Bergeron told Global News. His daughter was suffering convulsions caused by an abnormally high fever - but it was when he called 9-1-1 that Bergeron says insult was added to injury.

The paramedic flatly refused to speak to him in English.

"I'm fluently bilingual, very comfortable in French," Bergeron admitted. "But there are some terms in French that I wouldn't understand unless I studied about it."

Mark Bergeron and his family say that what seems to have been a political statement made a frightening situation even worse. "To have to experience something like this, especially with a two-year-old daughter in danger, is unacceptable." Bergeron said.

The ambulance brought the girl to the Lakeshore Hospital emergency room Saturday night. She has recovered and was released around midnight.

Stephanie Hansen, the young girl's mother, was terrified as she watched her daughter convulsing. Hansen grew up in New Brunswick and only speaks English. She was scared on Saturday - but says not understanding what was happening made the situation even more frightening. "For my family, for my friends and anybody else who might have to go through this and, God forbid, not know what's going on."

Global News contacted CETAM, the emergency service that serves Vaudreuil-Dorion area and a spokesperson confirmed that the agency is looking into the incident. Quebec's language laws make health situations complicated, but Quebec patient's rights advocate, Paul Brunet, thinks an issue like this is clear. "Any patient that requires health services is entitled to be understood by the healthcare giver."

What happened over the weekend is certainly clear in Mark Bergeron's mind. "We're not talking about getting paramedics to learn Mandarin to satisfy a small percentage of our population - we're talking about the two official languages of our country."

Another example of touching concern from S.R. It clearly states the father was bilingual but not comfortable explaining a medical emergency. A spokesman said that the employee was out of line and that "every paramedic in CETAM is supposed to be able to speak English in a functional manner." The paramedic will surely be reprimanded for putting a life in danger.

Nice priorities in Quebec if an anglophone Hallowe'en toy witch is of more concern than a convulsing 2-year-old little girl...

"Figures from the Office of the Commissioner for Official Languages show that 72 per cent of Canadians favour bilingualism across Canada, with the strongest regional support in Quebec, followed by Atlantic Canada. Even in Alberta, which has the lowest level of support, close to six in 10 favour bilingualism for all of Canada."

Where do you get that the vast majority is clear, bilingualism is a waste of money?

Sounds like someone is even more frustrated than usual today! I guess that's what happens when you finally realize that you've spent 5 decades of your life chasing after a pipe dream that will never happen...

"Where do you get that the vast majority is clear, bilingualism is a waste of money?"

As I said on Friday, Francos carefully select and magically de-contextualize only what suits them by ignoring the rest. Basically, what I don't like or approve of or consider useful to my interests cannot either exist or be worthwhile. Ergo, the best solution is denial.Look at S.R.: speaking French is far more important than saving a life. Could a person be more disgusting and revolting than that?

But I read the whole article, WA, and no where it said that "the vast majority is clear, bilingualism is a waste of money." Actually, almost all the article seems to support existing bilingualism, but wants to expand on other languages too. Why not substantiate your outlandish claim instead of simply narrating my actions? I believe you're the one who went fact-digging in that article, unless you thought the name ("is bilingualism still relevant in canada?") was a rhetorical question that could only be answered with "no".

From the dreadOk now, speaking of which(the referendum). I want to know what was REALLY the biggest factor that caused Mtl T to fall economically and lose ground to Toronto? The SEAWAY OPENING OR THE SEPARATIST MOVEMENT (with their threat of separation and bill 101?). I’ve been reading some posts on the Michel Patrice site and the villdemontreal.com either denying or not mentioning any contribution of the seppies in regard of the economic decline of the city….to me, it sounds ludicrous to think that the separatists are not AT LEAST part responsible for such downfall, thus thinking it was perhaps ONLY the WESTWARD PUSH or the SEAWAY OPENING the made it downslide…

Only a separatist would deny the fact that the decline of Montreal was mainly due to Bill 101 and thousands of businesses left because of it - the rush down the 401 was not imagination. They found it illogical and expensive and said to hell with it. My brother in law's firm left and said no matter what, they would never return to this province. They do very well in Toronto and have never been sorry.

Separatists are just like the Holocaust deniers: they deny the evidence, the reality, History and its results. Montreal has been declining since the PQ got into power and the decline is getting worse and worse. They are so wrapped-up in themselves that they aren't capable of distinguishing their reality from the Reality and most of the time they overlap their pipe dreams onto the Reality. They don't know anything better. They are like mice in little cages, spending their time spinning, with the idea that the more you spin, the faster you'll reach freedom outside the cage.

So far the people of the province of Quebec are simply avoiding any mention of what will happen to Indian Territory which they claim is part of Quebec, by simply over looking the fact that the indigenous Indian Tribes were here for millennium Thus the territorial claims lie firstly with the indigenous people of the region and not the Métis (Quebecois) that stayed on the territory of New France that was ceded to Great Britain by France on February 10, 1763.

The Ungava Territory was renamed New Quebec and was put for governance under the province of Quebec but was never part of New France and thus was never ceded to Britain by France, it was purchased by the Canadian government from the Hudson Bay Company of London, England. Since the all the Cree Territory was not part of New France, Quebec has absolutely no claim to it should it ever separate from Canada.

It is now up to the Aboriginal People of the Cree Territories, plus all other territories that are belonging to the indigenous peoples, which about two-thirds of present day Quebec also be part of the new province. That the indigenous peoples of the said region now form their own government and make their own laws, besides declaring that they are henceforth an independent province and not part of the province of Quebec. That all claims past and present to their TERRITORY by Quebec are now null and void. They should begin by issuing of documents such as driving licenses, birth certificates, marriage licenses etc. and establish these in fact to obtain international RECOGNITION. To go to the United Nations and state that they are NO longer part of any European colonial settlement or venture but an Aboriginal Nation now out of the control of Colonialist that seized their lands by military conquest and subterfuge. That they are rid of their colonial masters and have thrown off the yoke of European imperialists and seek recognition as all those countries of Africa and Asia did after centuries of European colonial domination. North America is after all the final frontier of de-colonization and the return to the indigenous peoples of all their territory stolen by the European colonial powers.

Now when the sword is at the throat of the Métis Nation (they are not French) of Quebec, we will see how far they can go to annex native lands that were never theirs to begin with in the past or the present.

You may not like it but the province of Kebec will be divided up, civil war? who knows maybe…but we will take back out land.

Hopefully the separatists will chock on their own venom but they had better accept the fact that the land, none of it, officially belongs to them. Should they wish problems, partition is the way it will go and I hope we're all ready for it. A lot of people on this blog seem to think that this will not happen but just because a bunch of people lay claim to something does not mean it is theirs without problems. Meanwhile, we have to put a stop to the harassment and language bigotry that they perpetrate on their own citizens day in and day out without a second thought. The country will not know that we are as fed up as they are with the separatists unless we speak out. Please speak out as much and as often as you can, by any means available.

Montreal should be splitted in half, half of it French would go to a separate Quebec and the West Island would go to Ontario as well as the Gatineau region. Beauce very federalist might also consider annexing with Maine USA.

No one is going over to the US. For some reason francophones appear to believe that Canadian and American culture is homogeneous, but I can assure you that it is not, and that any Canadian that wanted to be American has already moved, or is preparing to do so.

All this demonstrates is how little you know about what is outside your little isolationist bubble.

Just received two ads from Pizza Pizza and Pizza la Difference, both totally in French. Wrote complaints to both and told them I refuse to purchase any goods from businesses that do not include the English community in their ads and to stop trying to satisfy the separatist language bigots in this province. Everyone should be taking this attitude and action with these companies or they will think it's just fine to erase our language at their whim.

Good Job Cutie. I wish francophones outside Quebec would do what you do inside Quebec, it would lead to businesses being more respectful of their clients all over. It's easy to lapse into "why bother putting English, we're in Quebec" and vice versa otherwise.

Received a response from the PM's office concerning the e-mail I sent on 13 October 2012, requesting that no more power be given to Quebec due to the abuse of the Canadian citizens that reside in this province by the separatist government. Many other points were raised in this e-mail also - Anyway, the response I received stated that the letter was read very carefully and passed along to The Honourable Peter Penashue, Minister of Government Affairs and President of the Privy Council for further review and response as this is his area of expertise. We will see what comes of that but hoping some of these politicians are paying attention to the situation of the Canadians stuck at the mercy of these separatist language bigots.

I will do so. I repeat, if anyone likes I will post a copy of the letter(s) I've sent and/or received so people can use them as an example of what type of correspondence I'm sending. I've noticed, over the years, that a lot of people have problems putting their thoughts on paper so I am more than happy to provide such for their use. Just let me know and I will provide.

@True Montrealer - It really is disgusting that separatists like JR put their language bigotry ahead of the health and well being of a 2 year old baby. Shows what we can look forward to in this place if the separatists stay in power. Bunch of sickies really that don't deserve to live in a civilized society.

ha ha ha - Vigil.net says that there are military exercises going on in Montreal so Ottawa can show the separatists "who's the boss" - it is a coincidence because only a few weeks ago Quebec voted in a separatist government. This rag is a riot! I now read some of its items everyday cause they are a hoot!

My father was listening to the radio while commuting and heard that they interview the girl's father. Disgusting, but they won't fire the paramedic. They'll say "oh we need paramedics, we can't fire him" but in reality they favour francophones, because after all an anglo life is worth less.

Plus, imagine the hue and cry if he did get fired. "They fired me because of my political beliefs, because I believe in a free Quebec." The media would have a field day.

I hope they do fire him and let him cry foul. That way the whole world will see what a terrible situation we have in this province. They can write it any way they want - people will realize what is really going on.

Visionary,S.R. Is not stupid or cruel or ignorant. he is an intelligent man who is playing you all like an old violin. Everybody knows if you feed the trolls, they won't go away. He says things that are outlandish to annoy you so you will feel that you have to answer. Look away. It's so easy.

Visionary, If you follow his trend instead of just getting angry at him you'll see that he has people doing exactly what he wants. He wants to divert the posts from anything against separatism. In other words get mad at me not the government. The more outrageous he is the more people get mad and have to answer.

That paramedic is lucky, I would have got the best lawyer and ensure that no stone is left unturned until this person has a exemplary punishment. Cannot be given another chance for a child to be in danger, and it's infuriating that it was for something so unworthy. Good for the parents to make this public.

Perhaps we should learn from the Brits a bit more, in the areas of London where ethnics are present they ensure that they have staff that can communicate with the immigrants. In east London (where a lot of immigrants reside) the local public clinics have staff that can communicate/translate from Arabic to Tamil, Sihnalesse to Punjabi, usually have a big board listing all the languages they can offer...I know because I lived there. I did not see any of he medical staff fearing to loose their culture or English as a result of putting life first.

I hope the separatists are proud of themselves - the story of the little girl is all over the National News this morning. This should bring outrage from everyone in this country and point out the stupidity of the separatists' agenda.

Possibly, very unlikely, they'll get cracking to improve their French. Another possibility is that this incident will embitter them towards French and push them away. Or maybe a combination of the two. Contradictory as the two may be, many people in QC have to live with this contradiction - being fluent in a language that they don't view too favorably (mostly on account of dummies such as the paramedic in question, who don't even realize how much they -and those who defend them- hurt the image of their language and culture).

That paramedic also shows the idiocy of QC nationalist propaganda that encourages the expansion of the "battlefield" to every area of life. There are times and places to fight battles, there are times and places when you should put your "views" on the side. An emergency situation is an example of an area to which these idiotic politics should not brought in.

It would be too embarrassing to put on the news in Quebec - again, shame on them and I hope the guy is fired and the parents sue the ass off both the paramedics and the provincial government. That would be a court battle worth watching to see how they can explain away their cruelty and inhumane treatment of a fellow citizen in this country. You would think we live in a third world country rather than in Canada. These people have to go. Let them vote themselves out of Canada and, if necessary, if there are blocks of separatists that vote to stay and they are surrounded by Canadians on all side, negotiate re-location grants to let them out. Re-location grants have been used before for many things and it could work here. They have done it in Newfoundland when there was no more work in their areas and no reason it couldn't work here. Their land would be worth a lot more inside Canada and they will be able to buy a great new home in their new quebec. Time to send them off. Partition this province and let them go.

I agree adski but we have to start somewhere. That's why I'm fighting every way I can through letters to the Federal Government, Provincial Government, businesses and media outlets and I hope others follow my example. Just contributing to this blog is nice but it isn't doing enough to change the situation - we have to publicly show force against these separatists to stop them from trying to eliminate our rights and freedoms in Canada. This is our country - not theirs. They are the minority and we have tried to help them keep their culture and language and look at the way they are treating us. Are we to accept being second class citizens because of these bigots? We must fight back and show we have some backbone. We are proud Canadians and we should be proud to show it!